Pro-Choice Congressmen More Likely to Have Slutty Daughters

Because if you’re pro-choice, it’s clearly because you want to have dozens of abortions. Not, you know, because you care enough about women to want them to have adequate health care and the basic right to bodily integrity. Not because you’d like them to avoid death and physical injury from illegal abortion. Not because having daughters of your own might make issues like abortion and birth control access more real. Not because you’d like to see your daughters and women everywhere have children when they choose to.

Because your daughters are slutty.

The conclusion they want you to get from this is that pro-life Congressmen are insensitive to women and don’t have contact with any.

But I’d draw a different conclusion: Congressmen who are liberal are more likely to have slutty daughters. And therefore, they are more likely to support abortion for selfish, personal reasons.

Another conclusion: If you are pro-life, don’t vote for candidates with daughters.

Another conclusion: If you’re not a complete misogynist asshole, vote pro-choice. I’m glad Debbie so brilliantly illustrated that point.

And yet another conclusion: Debbie also brilliantly illustrates that anti-choice politics are about slut-shaming and punishing women, not about fetuses. Abortion should be illegal because those slutty Congressmen’s daughters should be forced to pay for their consensual sexual behavior by being forced to carry a pregnancy for nine months and go through a painful birth. A child should be a punishment for slutitude, and pregnancy should make women sorry they ever wanted to have sex in the first place. But I’m sure that Debbie, like most anti-choicers, will tell you that she really loves babies — she just wants to see them used as weapons against slutty women.

via Broadsheet.


Similar Posts (automatically generated):

31 comments for “Pro-Choice Congressmen More Likely to Have Slutty Daughters

  1. June 18, 2007 at 5:58 pm

    I poked a little through the blog. If I hadn’t vaguely heard her name somewhere, I’d swear the blog was supposed to be satire. The lack of logic, the slurs, the saying what we know the wingnuts think but won’t usually actually say… just, wow.

  2. Farhat
    June 18, 2007 at 6:04 pm

    I guess from that we can conclude that GW Bush is pro-choice. Hallelujah!

  3. DAS
    June 18, 2007 at 6:52 pm

    I’m confused: since the study doesn’t mention the sexual activity of the daughters involved, is she just assuming sluttiness? is she assuming all women are slutty?

  4. prairielily
    June 18, 2007 at 6:53 pm

    Can’t we just ignore her? She’s an IDIOT. She’s so stupid that no one should ever, ever take her seriously or pay attention to her. (I try not to personally insult people because they usually don’t deserve it, but in her case, I really mean it.)

  5. June 18, 2007 at 7:01 pm

    Are you sure that wasn’t satire? I read that entry last week and thought it was a piss-take.

  6. June 18, 2007 at 7:32 pm

    In another post (link goes to a critique, I’m not giving that nutbag extra traffic), she compares The Invisible Woman’s reasoning with rather than torturing the captured Silver Surfer in the second Fantastic Four movie to anti-torture propaganda designed to weaken our resolve in the eternal struggle against al-Qaeda.

    So there’s that, assuming anybody here wanted to quixotically attempt to “critique” her “methodology” with “conventional reasoning” and “logic.”

  7. RodeoBob
    June 18, 2007 at 7:33 pm

    Ah little Debbie Shlussel, or as the gang over at Sadly No! have dubbed her “Costo Coulter”.

    Just ignore her. Really.

  8. June 18, 2007 at 9:45 pm

    I thought it was satire too. I spent a good 30 minutes searching around on her site and Googling her before I determined that she is, in fact, for real.

  9. W. Kiernan
    June 18, 2007 at 10:24 pm

    Wow, I read your block-quote but I still didn’t believe it. I had to actually click that link and read it off the nitwit’s website before I could actually believe that even so low a life form as Schussel would descend to a weak-ass loser’s jibe like “liberal congressmen have slutty daughters.” Boy, and I really didn’t wanna go look at Schussel’s web site, let all them tainted electrons up into my personal computer, but I had to see for myself. Not that I’m accusing you Feministes of making stuff up but I can only imagine that she must have stolen that wise-crack from, like, Bubba-the-Love-Sponge.*

    And this morning I saw another data point on this punditorial trend over the cliff and into the swamp of foaming-at-mouth lunacy: that non-partisan moderate David Broder parenthetically commented en passant in another of his syndicated bloviations today, in these words, that he thought liberalism is the product of deprivation in one’s youth. Huh huh huh.

    Now when the best humoresque aside that the biggest name in right-wing moderate centrist punditry can produce reads precisely like a rip-off of that brain-fried junkie Limbaugh, you know these people are getting really desperate. How sad to see them sweat so hard ha ha ha ha ha! “Oh no, my precious tax cut, no no no no no please come back no, don’t let them take my precious away, noooooo!

    * B-the-L-S: local radio shock-jock of notorious deliberate imbecility and vulgarity. Almost a local legend! The crassest man in Tampa Bay.

  10. Jennifer
    June 18, 2007 at 10:44 pm

    Goddamn these idiots.

  11. Sophist, FCD
    June 19, 2007 at 1:32 am

    I thought it was satire too. I spent a good 30 minutes searching around on her site and Googling her before I determined that she is, in fact, for real.

    For very small values of “real”

  12. June 19, 2007 at 1:55 am

    The comments on that post make me want to stab myself in the eye.

    Definition of Sluttiness: Women who use sex as recreation…divorced from its’ UNITIVE and PROCREATIVE purposes. They opted out of the DIVINE PLAN for mankind, issued forever, since Genesis.

    Who are these women having recreational sex with? Not men, obviously, because men can’t be sluts. Perhaps there are more lesbians that I thought…but lesbians can’t have procreative sex even if they want to. Now I’m confused.

  13. StarStorm
    June 19, 2007 at 4:36 am

    … you mean that ISN’T satire? Wow. Well, it’s refreshingly… honest…

    One would think that neocons and their cronies wouldn’t just be up front like that. Still, it’s good, maybe it’ll wake the “useful idiots” up.

  14. Ann
    June 19, 2007 at 7:20 am

    While this made me rage for a few minutes, it’s hardly the worst thing Debbie Schlussel has come up with lately. She’s a member of the pro-war crimes crowd.

  15. Perkyshai
    June 19, 2007 at 9:54 am

    You know who else has slutty daughters? Pedophiles. Yep. All about the abortions, they are.
    /end scathing sarcasm.

  16. Yuri K.
    June 19, 2007 at 10:05 am

    The first comment is nothing but class, either.

  17. unrelatedwaffle
    June 19, 2007 at 10:42 am

    The problem is when you try to tell them they’re into slut-shaming rather than fetus-protecting, they don’t believe you, because they don’t know it themselves. I had this very debate with a conservative Louisiana friend of mine (who is black and had her house destroyed by Katrina, and yet still believes black people only have themselves to blame! Huh.), and during the course of the argument, it came out that she has two sisters who have had multiple abortions, and she disapproves of their sexual “promiscuity,” because you shouldn’t have sex unless you’re willing to take on the responsibility of a baby. The notion of a blastocyte being a baby is all mixed up with the slut-shaming for them, which is incredibly unfortunately for progress.

  18. Sunburned Counsel
    June 19, 2007 at 12:11 pm

    yeah Yuri, the first comment let me know they really weren’t messing around with the wingnuttery.
    In case you all missed it, the comment was concerned that the researcher’s name “Ebonya Washington”- didn’t sound enough like an old white man.

  19. Lee
    June 19, 2007 at 12:56 pm

    Allie, you’re my hero. Let’s form an eye-stabbing pact.

  20. Matthew
    June 19, 2007 at 1:02 pm

    Dammit, here I was having all this recreational sex with my wife. We’ve got one kid and do plan on another, but not yet. I guess we’ll be damned to hellfire just like the rest of those baby-murderers and people who talk on their cellphones while driving.

  21. Lee
    June 19, 2007 at 1:18 pm

    Matthew, you’re alright. Men can’t be expected to not have recreational sex, so it’s just your slutty wife who’s going to hell.

    I’m sure I’ll see her there, because after almost 5 years of marriage, I’m just now giving my husband a male heir. And after I have the baby, we’re going right back to our wicked, wanton ways, you know, having sex for fun. Maybe if I pretend it’s not fun we’ll both go to heaven. I’ll let you know how that works out.

  22. Tom
    June 19, 2007 at 1:51 pm

    Does anyone have the stats on Pro-Life Congressmen being more likely to sire nitwits?

  23. June 19, 2007 at 2:53 pm

    Sorry for the blogwhoring, but the study is actually quite interesting. I wrote about the original study back in march.

  24. Thealogian
    June 19, 2007 at 3:31 pm

    The original study found that Congressmen with daughters were more likely to hold positions that supported overall women’s rights and health. Including, support for domestic violence legislation, etc. So, by this conservatives understanding, does that mean that these Congressmen have “daughters who just need to be beat” too?

  25. June 19, 2007 at 3:32 pm

    …do you even have to ask?

  26. louise
    June 19, 2007 at 3:37 pm

    But what if Matthew and wife only have sex ONCE and conceive? Then I think she should get a pass on hell…but not TWICE. Nope. And don’t even think about enjoying it, slut!

    That’s for MEN.

    So says this whore who has failed, giving her husband “only” daughters, plans on no more kids, yet loves sex… just like her skanky mother before her.

  27. June 20, 2007 at 1:28 am

    I’ve always thought of Schlussel, Michelle Malkin, and Pam Oshrey as the Axis of Crazy. But Schlussel is the craziest, most batshit racist of them all. Here’s a column in which she says that studies on earwax prove that Native Americans are not really native to the Americas, and therefore had no more right to the land than the Europeans did.

  28. mythago
    June 20, 2007 at 10:06 am

    OMFG! Debbie! I haven’t heard of her in years. I knew her (well, of her–I sure didn’t want to talk to her) back when she was a wingnutlet.

  29. June 21, 2007 at 12:08 pm

    Well, it’s often said that the best way to make men feminists is to give them daughters… Deb the Nut Case is however wrong; conservatives with daughters have NO problem making exceptions for their princesses while abusing everyone else for exactly the same thing.

  30. June 22, 2007 at 6:14 am

    “If you are pro-life, don’t vote for candidates with daughters”

    Absolutely right. Furthermore:

    If you want more tax cuts for the rich and higher taxes for workers, don’t vote for a candidate who has ever held a real job.

    If you want more wars like Iraq, don’t vote for veterans.

    If you don’t want to hear any more about global warming, don’t vote for a candidate who has studied science.

    Leading up to the general principle:

    If you are stupid, don’t vote for candidates who know anything.

Comments are closed.